Space Monkey Mafia: GAME OVER!

[ibaesha]

Well it's difficult to comment on a vote that has no reasoning attached. Without comment, it appears to be you OMGUSing for Glork after he called for your head and you 'jokingly' calling him scum. I don't know if you're attempting to attach yourself to him or what, but something isn't right when I look at the interactions between the two of you. Then there's the Phoebus part of the whole thing. You vote Phoebus without giving a reason, Glork calls for your head, you call them scum together. I question wtf Glork is doing, you defend Glork by voting STD, then call Glork scum again. All you're doing is posting fluff, which is what Phoebus voted Sarcastro for in the first place, and I assume that Phoebus' vote on Sarcastro was why you voted for Phoebus (since you didn't give a reason then either).

FoS: Nightson

You're actions are starting to confuse me and I'm not buying the whole non-serious content is productive line. It's fine to a certain extent, but I think you're pushing it too far.

[MrBuddyLee]

Nightson, jokes on their own aren't scummy, but when a pattern emerges from them, or if it's all someone does, it's fair to draw some conclusions. You don't want to find Glork scummy, and you're cracking repeated jokes to try to sneak that point across to the town subtly.

Not my fault nobody decided to comment on my vote on StD.

Actually, you simply voted STD and typed a <3, so I'm not sure that should have been interpreted by anyone to mean jack. It looks like just another joke.

In my book the most important thing Day 1 is discussion and whether it comes about through people being serious or people reacting to non-serious content it's all discussion.

This looks a lot like Glork's "why is everyone attacking me for things that could be scummy it's my schtick" schtick. If it's just discussion, why get defensive about it?

[Glork]

In my book the most important thing Day 1 is discussion and whether it comes about through people being serious or people reacting to non-serious content it's all discussion.

This looks a lot like Glork's "why is everyone attacking me for things that could be scummy it's my schtick" schtick. If it's just discussion, why get defensive about it?

That's a pretty moronic notion. If a player is attacked, they have every right to defend themselves, whether being attacked and/or voted by one player, or being attacked/voted by multiple players.

I never understood this "getting defensive is scummy" bit. I see people accuse me of being scum on some actual basis. I defend myself against those accusations. That's sorta how this game is played. I do not expect people to attack me for behaving in a ridiculous manner. But if they do, I will continue to defend myself. I may complain about it (as I did earlier)... but I will still explain why my actions are not inconsistent with me being pro-town. I don't understand why you're telling Nightson that he should not be defending himself.

[MrBuddyLee]

I dunno, when someone feels the need to remind me a) that jokes aren't scummy and then b) that joking around d1 isn't scummy if it spawns any type of discussion, I see that as an extreme reaction to a tiny amount of suspicion. Plenty of scum pop into a defensive mindset earlier than townies because they know their opponents aren't scum.

I understand that scum like you aren't looking for such fine distinctions, Glork, and would therefore make light of other people's observations of hyperdefensiveness.

[Mr Stoofer]

Vote Count (unchanged)

MrBuddyLee: 4 (Fritzler, klebian, CES, inHimshallibe)
Glork: 3 (MrBuddyLee, STD, ibeasha)
Bogre: 1 (Glork)
Phoebus: 1 (Bogre)
klebian: 1 (Sarcastro)
bird1111: 1 (Twito)
Nightson: 1 (dahen)
Sarcastro: 1 (Phoebus)
Save The Dragons: 1 (Nightson)

It will take 9 of you to throw someone out of the airlock

[bird1111]

Not seeing why people are finding Nightson/Glork suspicious for typical early day 1 behavior

[Fritzler]

Not seeing why people are finding Nightson/Glork suspicious for typical early day 1 behavior

cuz theyre idiots and don't realize glork has mroe than one typical day 1 behavior

[Bogre]

I've seen glork play a lot different than he's playing today Day 1.

However, it seems to me that they're just randomly playing around and that too much is being read into NS's jokes and Glork's mistake.

[Save The Dragons]

Unvote, Vote: Bird

[Phoebus]

Exams till tuesday.
Don't expect posts.

[Sarcastro]

Unvote, Vote: bird1111

We can get klebian tomorrow.

[Save The Dragons]

The bird is the word

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Unvote, vote: Bird

[Twito]

*Points at sig*
Yes I mean the part that I'm away for the weekend.

[inHimshallibe]

Oh, those stalling lynches... the tales they tell.

[MrBuddyLee]

Your schtick is not looking particularly helpful at this point, but you're sure trying hard to appear helpful.

[Twomz]

There's nothing wrong w/ trying MBL XD.

I'm thinking of consolodating my vote, I want the leaders of the major wagons to convince me of which one to join . (That why we know why each bandwagon is forming ).

[Save The Dragons]

Unvote, Vote: MBL

-1 now

Unvote

The whole, "hee hee look at me I've placed MBL at -1 now, oh noes people are voting for me? ABORT! ABORT!" thing kinda makes me wonder.

[inHimshallibe]

Your schtick is not looking particularly helpful at this point, but you're sure trying hard to appear helpful.

So you

are

scum this game...

[Save The Dragons]

I'm not likin' the whole, "Let's pick some one first, and then find reasons they are scummy later" thing.

[MrBuddyLee]

I'm told it's inhim's thing. It's better than not posting, tbh.

[Save The Dragons]

wtf

rawr raaaaaaaaaawr raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawr

it's probably not worth it to nitpick on your playstyle, but I'm pretty sure I'm not going to follow you when you do that, inhim.

[inHimshallibe]

I'm not likin' the whole, "Let's pick some one first, and then find reasons they are scummy later" thing.

Show me where I've done this.

I'm told it's inhim's thing. It's better than not posting, tbh.

I think this is funny... really, it's my thing? Perhaps I'm just subconscious about it. I do like the way you try and dismiss my pressure on you by simply saying "Oh, it's inHim's thing." And then, "It's better than not posting, tbh." - LOL - way to ride that fence; you should be in rodeos or something.

wtf

rawr raaaaaaaaaawr raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawr

it's probably not worth it to nitpick on your playstyle, but I'm pretty sure I'm not going to follow you when you do that, inhim.

Tut tut, MBL, you're manipulation has already affected STD.

[MrBuddyLee]

I do like the way you try and dismiss my pressure on you by simply saying "Oh, it's inHim's thing."

See, it's only pressure if there's an apparent reason there. Otherwise, your vote exerts no more leverage than a random vote. In fact, an unreasoned vote actually SIPHONS pressure from its target because it makes other people look at the voter more closely than the votee.

Can the people not voting or still random voting please elaborate some suspicions, or at least comment on the two mini-wagons we've got going? Thanks.

[dahen]

Ok. I'm doing a re-read from start (well, the second start):

So, first this MBL-wagon. I guess we have at least some scum on it, and I don't think the last are scum, based on sticking out (yes it's WIFOM). But of the voters I would say Nightson/Klebian as most likely scum.

Then Glork shouting for the hammer. Of course he would say that he was joking if somebody hammered. But it's risky, since a newbie might fall for it. And that newbie would then be a target for accusations the next day as well. It's a potential two-mislynch scenario for the risk of a little joke.

Ibby has a point in that putting him at lynch-1 could be to get a claim. The voters might not admit it, but MBL could feel forced to claim and do that early which sure would be no good. Even if MBL never would claim because of this (so it seems from his comment), there was a lesser chance after Ibby's statement.

Then we have STD silently voting Glork, which surprises me since it's possible to write at least a mini-case against Glork. Then Glork explains himself and STD moves his vote silently away to Bird.

Then we have MBL smelling a suckup from klebian to Glork. My experience says however that it's more common for scum to point out suckups than to actually suckup.

Then we have Glork's post #42, which is good. So in the Glork-MBL battle, I am in favor of lynching MBL. Although we might have some more interesting candidates.

Bird got some attention for unvoting without reason. STD brought it up, but he was already voting Bird. Then Sarcastro and Twito followed. Then another silent vote from STD on Sarcastro. Some posts later he encourages us to string up Bird or Sarcastro, even though Sarcastro appearantly was based on a misunderstanding. I was actually a little onto Sarcastro for following STD so quickly against Bird, but Sarcs later posts didn't have scum vibes attached.

Then we have Phoebus who doesn't like Sarcs show. Well, neither do I, but I don't like Phoebus post. I agree with the content, but the wording sounds scummy. Twito obviously thinks so too. And later Nightson.

Then Twomz promised to analyze but voted Glork without much comment.
Maybe Phoebus and Twomz are scum.

But then it goes on. Ibby's #121 is great, but I don't think Glork is the play.

Finally votes on bird again.

I have trouble seeing constellations, but I will

vote Phoebus